Well OK another hour in and I can see there are some aspects of the visuals that have been improved, but seemingly as many that are a step back.

certainly the UK especially areas I know well, are now further from looking real than in 2020.

Not impressed so far.

I will say that I havnt experienced any problems with the streaming aspect yet and everything has loaded up ok, but I havnt flown anywhere near big cities and large airports yet.

GPU / CPU balance should be better with improved performance.  High with a few Ultral is all you need.  TLOD 200 and OLOD 100.

Don't overthink it.

dd

1 hour ago, Rusty Spanner said:

Just caved and bought 2024, Only plus I've found so far is that I can actually read the compass on the XCub.

I have no Idea how people can say the graphics are improved

Have you noticed the lighting, and the vegetation? 🙂

Just wait till the devs get the old stuff replaced by the new stuff.

dd

On 3/13/2025 at 10:15 PM, Bert Pieke said:

Have you noticed the lighting, and the vegetation? 🙂

Trees are better.

Lighting?, well shadows in the cockpit are improved, but Gauges on my favourite Wilga have gone fuzzy and less defined and the eye adpation thing is worse than in 2020.

lots of over exposure of anything white or light toned and the clouds actually look worse to me

It's a mixed bag for sure with to my mind as many regressive aspects as there are improvements

Flight dynamics are a touchy subject and I can only comment on the types I have flown irl and so far I dont have any of them for use in 2024.

the procedural rocks thing that someone here got all excited about alluded me for a while then I worked out that you needed to set 'rocks' to 'ultra' for the effect to work

and even then Its not really a well implemented feature or indeed very relevant.

Where I did see a big improvement was when flying low in a canyon with a river at its base, the river was far more convincing and the trees and surrounding terrain when very close was noticably more defined and realistic

 

On 3/9/2025 at 12:41 PM, Mike T said:

Look. I'm REALLY trying to like FS 2024. I REALLY am. Yesterday I was able to do some testing in FS 2024 and I saw a lot of promising things. But in the last 30 minutes I've tried to load the default A321LR and the default KMCO and gave up on that after 15 minutes. Now, I am trying to load the same aircraft at KLAX and the same spinning wheel.

 

@Mike T Hope you have solved the dreaded "Spinning Wheel". Two workarounds: First, set your TLOD (in graphics) to 10 (the bottom score) before you load. (This seems especially important when loading near a Photogrammetry city.) And second, as suggested above, when on the World Map zoom way out to space before you Start the flight. This pair of tricks has been posted before here: MSFS2024 Loading Flights Hangup - A Workaround.

Hope this helps,
M

12 hours ago, Rusty Spanner said:

Los árboles son mejores.

¿Iluminación?, bueno, las sombras en la cabina han mejorado, pero los indicadores de mi Wilga favorito se han vuelto borrosos y menos definidos y la adaptación de los ojos es peor que en 2020.

Mucha sobreexposición de cualquier cosa blanca o de tono claro y, en realidad, las nubes se ven peor para mí.

Es una mezcla de aspectos, sin duda, que, en mi opinión, tiene tantos aspectos regresivos como mejoras.

La dinámica de vuelo es un tema delicado y solo puedo comentar sobre los tipos que he volado en la vida real y hasta ahora no tengo ninguno para usar en 2024.

La cosa de las rocas procedimentales que entusiasmó a alguien aquí me eludió por un tiempo, luego me di cuenta de que necesitabas configurar 'rocas' en 'ultra' para que el efecto funcione.

Y aún así, no es una característica bien implementada o muy relevante.

Donde sí vi una gran mejora fue al volar bajo en un cañón con un río en su base, el río era mucho más convincente y los árboles y el terreno circundante, cuando estaban muy cerca, estaban notablemente más definidos y realistas.

 

If being a better tree is being able to surpass ten-story buildings and make semi-desert or desert areas look like Jumanji, if trees are better in 2024.

I never really stopped liking FS 2024, actually much more than I did FS 2020, but that doesn't mean I can't also see it's limitations, starting with the aspect that is more important for me - physics!

It's "plastic" / "synthetic" in the way it portrays flight. 

I alternate between a session in the Toliss A320 and the Fenix A320, and there's a HUGE difference in feel.

Light / colours are also superior in most aspects in X-Plane 12 for my liking.

Where MSFS is still unique is scenery detail in urban areas when using only default scenery. Nowhere can X-Plane, and even Aerofly FS 4 come to that level!

Weather depiction looks acceptable to me but again, I prefer X-Plane12's weather rendering under most circumstances.

Functionally both simulators are becoming really similar with their latest updates. I use default ATC in X-Plane 12 and it's far better structured than MSFS default. In MSFS I am forced to use either BATC or FSHUD (lately BATC only).

I played around with Career Mode, and it surely is nice to play, but I don't have much time to get going with it 😕

Looking forward now for my PMDG purchases to get available for FS 2024, and for FSLabs to bring their Airbuses in 🙂

 

Edited March 16, 20251 yr by jcomm

4 hours ago, jcomm said:

I never really stopped liking FS 2024, actually much more than I did FS 2020, but that doesn't mean I can't also see it's limitations, starting with the aspect that is more important for me - physics!

It's "plastic" / "synthetic" in the way it portrays flight. 

I alternate between a session in the Toliss A320 and the Fenix A320, and there's a HUGE difference in feel.

Light / colours are also superior in most aspects in X-Plane 12 for my liking.

Well, not surprising you keep saying this :), and that's your opinion of course.. a great many of us feel that 2024 flight dynamics are anything but "plastic" and "synthetic" (2020 isn't either), and are a noticeable improvement over 2020 when using aircraft that take advantage of the new FDE features. Many simmers and IRL pilots have chimed in re: this and concur, including those who always were critical of certain aspects of MSFS flight dynamics like Blackbox711 about lack of inertia who now feels it is modelled properly in 2024.

And you mention Fenix vs Toliss.. well, an IRL 320 captain like V1 Simulations who has used both a lot did a detailed comparison and concluded that the Fenix tops the Toliss when it comes to flight dynamics: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/654326-msfs-2024-flight-dynamics-and-groundwater-handling-thread/page/8/#findComment-5265248 (detailed scoring below). And from all the other input/feedback/reviews received in this thread, it's clear what the majority consensus is re: flight dynamics in 2024.

I've used all the sims prior to MSFS and now 2024, and just don't see any other sim holding tangible advantages in the area of flight dynamics any more. As always, it comes down to the implementation of the flight model by the aircraft developer, and with the core FDE advancements in 2024 (and the various different tools and frameworks it provides for aircraft FM development) it is now even more the case that it's the aircraft developer, not the core sim platform, that makes or breaks an FM for that aircraft.

Re: lighting, I feel that 2024's lighting and colors, with its new revamped photometric lighting engine is superior to 2020, XP12, and other sims.. for my liking 🤷‍♂️

--------------------

V1-Simuations' (IRL airbus pilot) detailed comparison of Fenix in 2024 vs Toliss in XP12: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTOeK4Zn630&t=7669s
                                              Toliss    Fenix
Acceleration                          10         10
Decel                                      7          10     (IRL is 66secs, Fenix is 64s, Toliss is 84secs)
Control input response          9          9.5    ("dang near perfect, Fenix feels more realistic .. Toliss feels like I'm constantly driving a truck")
Inertia in air                            9          9       ("both felt good")
Inertia on the ground             7          9       ("in MSFS 2020 it's a 7, a straight-up big difference")
X-wind physics in flight         8          9.5    ("Toliss is good but Fenix is more accurate")
X-wind physics touchdown   8          9.5    ("I was that impressed, did my natural inputs as in IRL and it behaved as in IRL")
X-wind physics on ground    6         9
X-wind physics roll-out         7          9        ("crosswind physics in 2024 is awesome")
-----
3D model                               5         10
Sounds                                   7         10
Textures                                 5          9.8
wings flap                              7          10
------
Total score w/o visuals        77%      94%
Total score w/ visuals          73%      95%

Not surprising given Fenix's detailed attention to numbers and refining their FM: https://fenixsim.com/blog/entries/2024-11-15_fenix_a32x_by_the_numbers/
 

On 3/9/2025 at 10:41 AM, Mike T said:

Look. I'm REALLY trying to like FS 2024. I REALLY am. Yesterday I was able to do some testing in FS 2024 and I saw a lot of promising things. But in the last 30 minutes I've tried to load the default A321LR and the default KMCO and gave up on that after 15 minutes. Now, I am trying to load the same aircraft at KLAX and the same spinning wheel. I've got 64GB of RAM, a high-end system, and dual 1GB AT&T links. So half an hour of my time wasted staring at a spinning wheel? I've tried the East Coast server and now the West Coast server, but same garbage.

Meanwhile, my GPU fan is whirring away on the teaser screen as I float over the airport fully loaded but never get down to the aircraft.

Mike T.

I have added nothing to the community folder and it takes a while to load to the airport. I think they just broke something. Hopefully they will fix it soon. 

@lwt1971,

I see your point - expected reaction as usual - but I stay with my view, and honestly after more than 30 yrs simming, and 45 flying for real, I believe I feel confident about the way I try to find the "feel of flight" in a desktop flight simulator.

To each his own though...

If you ever get the chance to try a CAE + Evans & Sutherland, ... rw Level-D A320 sim, that would help understanding why my opinion is always the same, and, until I have good reasons to review it, which I would be glad to be able to, I'm really keeping my opinion as valid, at least to me 😉 and happily continue to use both sims, because both have good pros, despite of their cons...

Edited March 16, 20251 yr by jcomm

5 hours ago, jcomm said:

I never really stopped liking FS 2024, actually much more than I did FS 2020, but that doesn't mean I can't also see it's limitations, starting with the aspect that is more important for me - physics!

It's "plastic" / "synthetic" in the way it portrays flight. 

I alternate between a session in the Toliss A320 and the Fenix A320, and there's a HUGE difference in feel.

Light / colours are also superior in most aspects in X-Plane 12 for my liking.

Where MSFS is still unique is scenery detail in urban areas when using only default scenery. Nowhere can X-Plane, and even Aerofly FS 4 come to that level!

Weather depiction looks acceptable to me but again, I prefer X-Plane12's weather rendering under most circumstances.

Functionally both simulators are becoming really similar with their latest updates. I use default ATC in X-Plane 12 and it's far better structured than MSFS default. In MSFS I am forced to use either BATC or FSHUD (lately BATC only).

I played around with Career Mode, and it surely is nice to play, but I don't have much time to get going with it 😕

Looking forward now for my PMDG purchases to get available for FS 2024, and for FSLabs to bring their Airbuses in 🙂

 

If Austin can get scenery anywhere near 2024 a lot of people would make the switch. 

6 minutes ago, RobJC said:

If Austin can get scenery anywhere near 2024 a lot of people would make the switch. 

Absolutely!

21 minutes ago, jcomm said:

@lwt1971,

I see your point - expected reaction as usual - but I stay with my view, and honestly after more than 30 yrs simming, and 45 flying for real, I believe I feel confident about the way I try to find the "feel of flight" in a desktop flight simulator.

To each his own though...

If you ever get the chance to try a CAE, Evans & Sutherland, ... rw Level-D A320 sim, that would help understanding why my opinion is always the same, and, until I have good reasons to review it, which I would be glad to be able to, I'm really keeping my opinion as valid, at least to me 😉 and happily continue to use both sims, because both good pros, despite of their cons...

That's cool, expected reaction as usual. After my years of simming since the mid 80s from Sublogic, to Flight Unlimited, to various MS sims, to P3D, to XP, to MSFS 2020+2024, I believe I too feel confident about the way I try to find the "feel of flight" in desktop sims 🙂 

Your opinion as an IRL glider pilot is noted, but I'll go with the IRL 320 captains'/pilots' views when it comes to evaluating the 320, similarly the IRL pilots of Cessnas when it comes to evaluating the in-sim C172, etc 🙂 

To each indeed their own.
 

Edited March 16, 20251 yr by lwt1971

37 minutes ago, lwt1971 said:

Well, not surprising you keep saying this :), and that's your opinion of course.. a great many of us feel that 2024 flight dynamics are anything but "plastic" and "synthetic" (2020 isn't either), and are a noticeable improvement over 2020 when using aircraft that take advantage of the new FDE features. Many simmers and IRL pilots have chimed in re: this and concur, including those who always were critical of certain aspects of MSFS flight dynamics like Blackbox711 about lack of inertia who now feels it is modelled properly in 2024.

And you mention Fenix vs Toliss.. well, an IRL 320 captain like V1 Simulations who has used both a lot did a detailed comparison and concluded that the Fenix tops the Toliss when it comes to flight dynamics: https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/654326-msfs-2024-flight-dynamics-and-groundwater-handling-thread/page/8/#findComment-5265248 (detailed scoring below). And from all the other input/feedback/reviews received in this thread, it's clear what the majority consensus is re: flight dynamics in 2024.

I've used all the sims prior to MSFS and now 2024, and just don't see any other sim holding tangible advantages in the area of flight dynamics any more. As always, it comes down to the implementation of the flight model by the aircraft developer, and with the core FDE advancements in 2024 (and the various different tools and frameworks it provides for aircraft FM development) it is now even more the case that it's the aircraft developer, not the core sim platform, that makes or breaks an FM for that aircraft.

Re: lighting, I feel that 2024's lighting and colors, with its new revamped photometric lighting engine is superior to 2020, XP12, and other sims.. for my liking 🤷‍♂️

--------------------

V1-Simuations' (IRL airbus pilot) detailed comparison of Fenix in 2024 vs Toliss in XP12: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTOeK4Zn630&t=7669s
                                              Toliss    Fenix
Acceleration                          10         10
Decel                                      7          10     (IRL is 66secs, Fenix is 64s, Toliss is 84secs)
Control input response          9          9.5    ("dang near perfect, Fenix feels more realistic .. Toliss feels like I'm constantly driving a truck")
Inertia in air                            9          9       ("both felt good")
Inertia on the ground             7          9       ("in MSFS 2020 it's a 7, a straight-up big difference")
X-wind physics in flight         8          9.5    ("Toliss is good but Fenix is more accurate")
X-wind physics touchdown   8          9.5    ("I was that impressed, did my natural inputs as in IRL and it behaved as in IRL")
X-wind physics on ground    6         9
X-wind physics roll-out         7          9        ("crosswind physics in 2024 is awesome")
-----
3D model                               5         10
Sounds                                   7         10
Textures                                 5          9.8
wings flap                              7          10
------
Total score w/o visuals        77%      94%
Total score w/ visuals          73%      95%

Not surprising given Fenix's detailed attention to numbers and refining their FM: https://fenixsim.com/blog/entries/2024-11-15_fenix_a32x_by_the_numbers/
 

Thanks for posting this and I remember V1 doing this comparison on live feed. I like V1 but I feel he is a little too bias to Fenix at the moment and while there are some serious competitors close to them and their product (FSLabs, Toliss, PMDG, Flight Factor, Leonardo).